Lecture 12.

Theme. The sentence and the utterance. Simple sentence.

1. The sentence.
2. Different approaches to the study of the sentence.
3. The utterance. Informative structure of the utterance.
4. The verbocentric conception of the sentence.
5. The semantic interpretation of the sentence.

1. The sentence.
It is rather difficult to define the sentence as it is connected with many
lingual and extra lingual aspects – logical, psychological and
philosophical. We will just stick to one of them - according to
academician G. Pocheptsov, the sentence is the central syntactic
construction used as the minimal communicative unit that has its
primary predication, actualises a definite structural scheme and
possesses definite intonation characteristics. This definition works only
in case we do not take into account the difference between the sentence
and the utterance. The distinction between the sentence and the utterance
is of fundamental importance because the sentence is an abstract
theoretical entity defined within the theory of grammar while the
utterance is the actual use of the sentence. In other words, the sentence is
a unit of language while the utterance is a unit of speech.
The most essential features of the sentence as a linguistic unit are a)
its structural characteristics – subject-predicate relations (primary
predication), and b) its semantic characteristics – it refers to some fact
in the objective reality. It is represented in the language through a
conceptual reality
We may define the proposition as the main predicative form of
thought. Basic predicative meanings of the typical English sentence are
expressed by the finite verb that is immediately connected with the
subject of the sentence (primary predication).
To sum it up, the sentence is a syntactic level unit, it is a predicative
language unit which is a lingual representation of predicative thought
(proposition).

2. Different approaches to the study of the sentence.

a) Principal and secondary parts of the sentence.
 b) Immediate constituents of the sentence. IC analysis.
To grasp the real structure of the English sentence, one must
understand not only words that occur but also the principles of their
arrangement. Each language has its own way of structural grouping.
English has dichotomous phrase structure, which means that the phrase
in English can always be divided into two elements (constituents) until
we get down to the single word. All groups of words are arranged in
levels. The name given by linguists to these different levels of
relationship is immediate constituents.
c) Oppositional analysis.
The oppositional method in syntax means correlating different
sentence types: they possess common features and differential features.
Differential features serve the basis for analysis.
E.g. two member sentence: one member sentence (John worked::
John! Work! Or: I speak English: I don’t speak English.
d) Constructional analysis.
According to the constructional approach, not only the subject and the
predicate but also all the necessary constituents of primary predication
constitute the main parts because they are constructionally significant.
Therefore, the secondary parts of the sentence are sometimes as
necessary and important as the main ones. If we omit the object and the
adverbial modifier in the following sentences they will become
grammatically and semantically unmarked: Bill closed the door; She
behaved well.
The structural sentence types are formed on the basis of kernels (basic
structures). Three main types of propositional kernels may be
distinguished: N V, N is A, N is N. However, if we take into account the
valent properties of the verbs (their obligatory valency) the group will
become larger (8 kernels), e.g. N1 V N2 N3: John gave Ann the book,
N1 V N2: I see a house.
The kernel sentences form the basis for syntactic derivation. Syntactic
derivation lies in producing more complex sentences
Syntactic processes may be internal and external. Internal syntactic
processes involve no changes in the structure of the parts of the
sentence. They occur within one and the same part of the sentence
(subject, etc.). External syntactic processes are those that cause new
relations within a syntactic unit and lead to appearance of a new part of
the sentence.
The internal syntactic processes are:
 Expansion Compression
The phone was ringing and They were laughing and singing
ringing
Complication Contamination
(a synt. unit becomes complicated) (two parts of the sentence are
joined)
I have seen it I could have seen i
together – e.g. double predicate The moon rose red
Replacement – the use of the words that have a generalized meaning:
one, do, etc, I’d like to take this one.
Representation – a part of the syntactic unit represents the whole
syntactic unit: Would you like to come along? I’d love to.
Ellipsis – Where are you going? To the movies.
The external syntactic processes are:
Extension - a nice dress – a nice cotton dress.
Adjoinment - the use of specifying words, most often particles: He
did it – Only he did it.
Enclosure – inserting modal words and other discourse markers: after
all, anyway, naturally, etc.

3. The utterance. Informative structure of the utterance.

The utterance as opposed to the sentence is the unit of speech. The
main categories of the utterance from the point of view of its informative
structure are considered to be the theme and the rheme. They are the
main components of the Functional Sentence Perspective (FSP) – actual
division of the sentence (most language analysts stick to the term
“sentence” but actually they mean “utterance”).
In English, there is a “standard” word order of Subject + Verb +
Object: The cat ate the rat – here we have a standard structure (N1 + V
+ N2). However, there are numerous other ways in which the semantic
content of the sentence can be expressed:
1. The rat was eaten by the cat.
2. It was the cat that ate the rat.
3. It was the rat that the cat ate.
4. What the cat did was ate the rat.
5. The cat, it ate the rat.
Which of these options is actually selected by the writer or the
speaker will depend on the context in which the utterance occurs and the
importance of the information. One important consideration is whether
the information has already been introduced before or it is assumed to be
known to the reader or listener. Such information is referred to as given
information or the theme. It contrasts with information which is
introduced for the first time and which is known as new information or
the rheme.
Informative structure of the utterance is one of the topics that still
attract the attention of language analysts nowadays. It is well recognized
that the rheme marking devices are:
1. Position in the sentence. As a rule new information in English
generally comes last: The cat ate the rat.
2. Intonation.
3. The use of the indefinite article. However, sometimes it is
impossible (as in 1): A gentleman is waiting for you.
4. The use of ‘there is’, ‘there are’. There is a cat in the room.
5. The use of special devices, like ‘as for’, ‘but for’, etc.: As for
him, I don’t know.
6. Inverted word order: Here comes the sun.
7. The use of emphatic constructions: It was the cat that ate the rat.
However, sometimes the most important information is not expressed
formally: The cat ate the rat after all. The rheme here is ‘the rat’. At the
same time there is very important information which is hidden or
implicit: the cat was not supposed to do it, or – it was hard for the cat to
catch the rat, or – the cat is a vegetarian (this hidden information will
depend on the context or situation). In other words, we may say that this
sentence contains two informative centres, or two rhemes – explicit and
implicit.

4. The verbocentric conception of the sentence.

The verbocentric conception of the sentence is based on the
alternative interpretation of the syntactic structure of the sentence, its
functional or syntactic positions. Unlike the traditional grammar, which
says that there are two principal parts in the sentence –the subject and
the predicate, the verbocentric conception (or verb-centered conception)
argues that the main part of the sentence is the verb.
This conception has been worked out by L. Tesniere. According to
this theory the verb determines the constituent structure of the whole
sentence. L.Tesniere pictured the sentence as a “small drama”, centered
around an action, denoted by the verb-predicate and its participants
which he termed “actants” (the subject and the object of the sentence)
and “circonstants” (the time, the place, the quality of the action). In other
words, the verb opens up some syntactic positions for other parts of the
sentence.
This combining power of the verb (or its combinability) L. Tesniere
called the valency of the verb. Thus, in the sentence “We started our
journey at the dawn” the verb predicate “start” denotes an action, while
the other parts denote its participants: “We” – the subject or the doer of
the action, “journey” its object. So there are two actants of the verb.
There’s also one circonstant “at the dawn”, which denotes the time of
the action. Thus, the syntactic structure of the sentence according to
L.Tesniere is conditioned by the syntactic valency of the verb predicate.
The syntactic valency of the verb can be of two cardinal types:
obligatory and optional. The obligatory valency is necessary realized in
the sentence, otherwise the sentence is grammatically incomplete.
Obligatory valency mostly refers to the actants –the subject and the
object. The optional valency is not significant for the competence of the
sentence. It may or may not be realized depending on the needs of
communication . The optional valency, as a rule, is the adverbial valency
of the verb.

5. The semantic interpretation of the sentence.

It’s important to point out that all verb predicates are not identical, as
there are different types of verbs, denoting them. We can distinguish
between transitive (to raise) and intransitive (to rise) verbs, between
verbs, denoting action (to make), state (to be), or relation (to have, to
belong), between causative (to cause, to force, to order) and
noncausative (to look) verbs. Different types of verbs open different
positions for actants or, in other words, different types of verbs have
different valency.
The semantic meaning of the verb determines its ability (or inability)
to combine with different types of actants. This can be described from
the point of view of semantic interpretation of the sentence. The
semantic interpretation of the sentence and its structure is now
commonly given in terms of semantic cases or semantic functions of
actants. This type of semantic description, called “case grammar”
(падежная грамматика) (“role grammar” – ролевая грамматика) has
been first employed by Ch. Fillmore in his book “The case for case”
(«Дело о падеже»).
 According to his viewpoint the semantic case is the type of semantic
relations, occurring between the verb predicate and its actants: Agentive,
Dative, Instrumental, Factitive (фактитив), Locative (местный падеж),
Objective (объектный, косвенный падеж), etc. Agentive is the case of
the typically animate instigator of the action identified by the verb,
e.g.: He broke the window. The window was broken by him.
Instrumental is the case of the inanimate force or object causally
involved in the action or state identified by the verb,
e.g.: The hammer broke the widow. He broke the window with the
hammer.
Dative is the case of the animate being affected by the state or action
identified by the verb or nominative part of the predicative,
e.g.: He believed that he was right. We encouraged him to go there.
The failure was obvious to him.
Factitive is the case of the object or result from the action or state
identified by the verb, or understood as a part of the meaning of the
verb,
e.g.: I waved a salute. I thought up a plan. I xeroxed up three copies
of his letter.
Locative is the case which identifies the location or spatial orientation
of the state or action identified by the verb or nominative part of the
predicative, e.g.: Here is noisy. It is noisy here. Objective, the
semantically most neutral case, the case of anything representable by a
noun. It represents a thing which is affected by the action or state
identified by the verb,
e.g.: I xeroxed his letter. His letter was Xeroxed by me.
Thus, the semantic interpretation of the sentence is given in terms of
semantic cases or semantic functions of actants and is conditioned by the
semantic meaning of the verb.

6. The cognitive aspects of the simple sentence.

Traditional grammar holds that a simple sentence normally consists of
3 key elements: a subject, a verb element(or predicate) and a
complement (an object or an adverbial).
This standard pattern can be illustrated in the following examples:
1. Susan resembles my sister.
2. Susan is peeling a banana.
3. Susan loves bananas.
4. The hammer breaks the glass.
 5. Susan has a large library.
6. Susan received the present.
7. Susan swam the Channel.
8. The garden is swarming with bees.
9. There was a loud bang (R.Langacker’s examples).
Though all these examples contain the said elements, they are in fact
rather divergent. The subjects refer to persons, things, places or they are
empty (as “there”-subject in the last example). Persons, things and
places are also eligible as complements. In one case (sent.1) the subject
and the object can be exchanged, while this is not possible with the other
sentences, and the transformation into passive sentences is also
restricted.

List of books:
1. B. Ylyish “The Structure of Modern English Language”, 1991.
2. B.I. Khaimovich, B.L. Rogovskaya “A Course in English
Grammar”, M. 1997.
3. F.M. Berezin “Lecture on Linguistics”, M. 1999.
4. Л.С. Бархударов, Д.А. Штеллинг “Грамматика английского
языка”, М. 2003.
5. Geoffrey Leech, Jan Svartvik “A Communicative Grammar of
English”, M. 1983.
6. E.M. Gordon, I.P. Krylova “A Grammar of Present-Day English”,
M., 1986.
7. Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, Jan Svartvik
“A University Grammar of English Language”, M., 1982.

Questions:
1. The characteristics of the sentence.
2. The main categories of the utterance.
3. Oppositional and Constructional analyses of the sentence.
4. Different types of semantic relations.